Opinion
(8657)
Argued May 8, 1990
Decision released July 3, 1990
Appeal from the decision by the named defendant denying the plaintiffs application for a permit to construct a dock from certain of the plaintiff's real property into adjacent tidal waters, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of Hartford-New Britain at Hartford, where the court, Schaller, J., granted the named defendant's motion to dismiss and rendered judgment dismissing the appeal, from which the plaintiff appealed to this court. Affirmed.
Creighton M. English, for the appellant (plaintiff).
David H. Wrinn, assistant attorney general, with whom, on the brief, were Clarine Nardi Riddle, attorney general, and Joseph Rubin and Brian J. Comerford, assistant attorneys general, for the appellee (named defendant et al.).
Edward V. O'Hanlan, for the appellee (defendant Cedar Point Yacht Club).
The sole issue in this case is whether failure to annex a citation to a petition of appeal from the final decision of an administrative agency of this state deprives the Superior Court of jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. The trial court granted a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and we agree.
This case is controlled by DelVecchio v. Department of Income Maintenance, 18 Conn. App. 13, 555 A.2d 1007 (1989). This court in DelVecchio said: "In addition to proper service, a valid appeal must contain a citation signed by a competent authority and contain a notice of the return date and notice of the requirement of filing an appearance. Chestnut Realty, Inc. v. CHRO, 201 Conn. 350, 356-57, 514 A.2d 749 (1986); Atkins v. Bridgeport Hydraulic Co., 5 Conn. App. 643, 645-46, 501 A.2d 1223 (1985). Here, the plaintiff failed to annex a citation to her petition. She claims that the elimination of the requirement of service by a sheriff also abolished the necessity of a citation. That is not the law; nor is this a case of first impression.
"The necessity of a citation was first ruled upon by the Appellate Session of the Superior Court in Board of Education v. State Board of Education, 38 Conn. Sup. 712, 716, 461 A.2d 997 (1983), and subsequently by this court in Atkins v. Bridgeport Hydraulic Co., supra. `"The citation is a matter separate and distinct from the sheriff's return and is the important legal fact upon which the judgment rests. . . . A proper citation is essential to the validity of the appeal and the jurisdiction of the court." (Citation omitted.) Village Creek Homeowners Assn. v. Public Utilities Commission, [ 148 Conn. 336, 339, 170 A.2d 732 (1961)]. The purpose of General Statutes 4-183 (b) is not to obviate the need for a citation, but rather to permit service upon the administrative agency in a manner different from ordinary civil actions, that is, by registered or certified mail.' Atkins v. Bridgeport Hydraulic Co., supra.
"Either the lack of proper service upon the department of income maintenance or the lack of a citation would have been fatal to the plaintiff's appeal." DelVecchio v. Department of Income Maintenance, supra, 15-16.
Since the adoption of the Uniform Administrative Procedure Act; General Statutes 4-166 et seq.; and through every amendment since its adoption, a citation is required for the trial court to acquire jurisdiction over an administrative appeal from a state agency.